I know what they are - they are good - much better than what they were 3 years ago, but to say they are now as good as SLR for tacking, you would have to be kidding yourself.

If you want shoot an image matching my shot to prove the point, you'll need to shoot it at 160mm F3.2.

From the ground you should be able to identify exactly where in the photo the focal plane is. It's approximately the front edge of the sideways brick in front of the pebble, or, about the tip of the dogs nose. You are, I presume, comparing shadowed areas with shadowed areas?

Second, I don't have to shoot the exact same image as you. I can shoot anything I like, with any lens I like. It's pretty easy to tell if the focus is accurate enough or not, even with a slow lens. Don't worry. I'm used to people who want to shift the goalposts. I'd like to know what happens if I go out and grab a very shallow DoF, "fast action" photo. What's the next request?

Can't say I've seen too many (anyone?) people claim M4/3s C-AF is better than a DSLRs PDAF. I have however seen some very stupid DSLR users make blanket claims that M4/3s cannot get shots like these, followed by posting birds, dogs and bees.

As you can tell from my gallery, the C-AF from m4/3s is hardly the penalty you keep claiming it to be.